Buddist Monks

[siamsam]

I recently saw a Buddist monk in a Bangkok shopping centre with tattoo's, a packet of cigarettes and a mobile phone trying to get a glimpse of the covers of pornographic vcd covers over the shoulder of some tourists - I guess he was just a bad apple right? Actually I've seen quite a few of the above in Thailand. Also why is it that my understanding of Buddism - The transient and emptiness of life and the escape from samsara etc etc seems to conflict with how I see the average Thai on the street living his/her life?

[sabaijai]

I recently saw a Buddist monk in a Bangkok shopping centre with tattoo's, a packet of cigarettes and a  mobile phone trying to get a glimpse of the covers of pornographic vcd covers over the shoulder of some tourists - I guess he was just a bad apple right? Actually I've seen quite a few of the above in Thailand. Also why is it that my understanding of Buddism - The transient and emptiness of life and the escape from samsara etc etc seems to conflict with how I see the average Thai on the street living his/her life?

Neither tattoos nor cigarette-smoking are against the rules for Buddhist monks. Perusing pornography is, if they're fully ordained monks but not if they're novice monks. If you could see tattoos on their upper arms then they were novices and follow only 10 vows, none of which bars pornography (though I'm sure their abbot wouldn't be happy about it), since monks must cover both shoulders whenever they're outside the monastery wall.

There are plenty of 'bad' novices and monks in Thailand, and many more who are merely going through the motions to fulfill social obligations, although in my observation the vinaya is more strictly followed - in general - here than in any other Theravadin country.

As for whether Thais in general are practicing Buddhism as they should, are any citizens of any country fully representative of their country's majority religion? Typically not, I think.

Your understanding of Buddhism will almost always conflict with someone else's understanding of it, that's the way views are. The wise thing to do is not search out conflict, but to further cultivate one's own understanding

Solitude is happiness for one who is content,

who has heard the Dhamma and clearly sees.

Non-affliction is happiness in the world -

harmlessness towards all living beings.

Udana 10

[andyinkat]

As someone who has lived in a Buddhist monastery with many monks and nuns of varying character I would say this:

It is a very common expectation of westerners that all monks be somehow holy and nigh-on enlightened. But that's like assuming any Christian is saintly purely because they attend church.

In the monastery I lived in many of the monks bore tattoos - they had lives prior to taking robes. Many monks were frankly quite unspiritual - but you have to consider why they are in robes. Some take robes to fulfil family expectations and have little real interest. Some do it for an 'easy life' - although they tend not to remain in robes too long.

In Nepal many monks are children - the monastery takes them in and gives them not only a good education but food and warmth - they come from villages in the himalayas where live is extremely precarious.

These factors man be less relevant for modern-day Thailand but the key point to consider is this - Buddhism promotes compassion. It is not terribly compassionate to say 'you're not holy enough, go away'. Providing the person meets the minimum requirements set down by the Buddha he can enter a Sangha and begin on the spiritual path. The more sincere effort and commitment the person puts into his practice the more merit he will accrue and the better his rebirth - but this is an internal and individual matter; in Buddhism it is not for others to judge.

[NaiGreg]

Many Thais are embarrassed by the mis-behavior of a few monks. And my wife will [quietly] avoid monks that smoke or speak in an un-monk-like way.

On the other hand, everyone seems to like a juicy scandal, and it is not unusual for the Thai tabloids to run a shock story about a ya-baa abbott and a local woman who just can't stop herself from getting involved with him.

Is it wide-spread? I don't think so.

[Gohonzon]

In the monastery I lived in many of the monks bore tattoos - they had lives prior to taking robes.

Wearing of tattoos obviously isn't an issue as that's very much part of Thai culture,as you say many had lives before.

But let's face it many men ordain for reasons other than to follow in the footsteps of the Buddha.A bed,roof,quite a cushy life-style and food-things that may be hard to obtain in the world outside.Phra Farang's book 'Little Angels' describes how many boys ordain because that is the only way that they'll get any sort of education.This is especially true of those from the poorer regions of Issan.

Thai Buddhism is,and has been, in something of a crisis for some time now.Not least because of some scandals concerning some various head monks behaviour.It's also stated that one in four of monks smoke.But as I understand it this is now being addressed,although I think on dubious grounds,i.e. the precept about taking intoxicating substances.Perhaps better teaching on attachment would be more pertinent here.

None of this deflects from the fact that there are ,and have been,some excellent Ajarns in the Theravada tradition in Thailand.Nor,that some temples-albeit a minority- now take on a much more dharma (dhamma) centred approach to their life-styles.It's also unfortunate that socially engaged Buddhism hasn't really had much impact on Theravada Buddhism in Thailand ,and elsewhere,to a significant degree.But there again Budhahood and enlightenment are to be found nowhere outside of the realities of everyday life: monastic seperation from the world- is only at best-a more conducive environment for self absorbtion.

[sabaijai]

monastic seperation from the world- is only at best-a more conducive environment for self absorbtion.

At best? Quite a strong view, Gohonzon. I don't think anyone would disagree that the potential for 'self-absorption' is there, in the monk's life, but there's also the potential for much more than that. Just as you say not all monks are bad, I don't think you can condemn all monasticism as 'at best ... more conducive to self absorption [than lay life].'

One could argue - and the Theravada school generally does argue - that the householder life is more self-centred. Obviously one can achieve much, spiritually, in either life station. But if you are arguing that the potential is higher for the householder I think you'll find a lot of disagreement from Buddhists around the world, yes primarily Theravadins but also many in Zen, Vajrayana, etc. For Mahayana in general, the Buddha nature may be recognised in everyone, yet even most Mahayana/Zen/Vajrayana Buddhists still support monasticism.

If the householder life were inherently better, then why have monasteries at all? Some people - mostly Westerners - may argue that they're not necessary at all, but I would say that's an extreme view.

Of course some folks prefer to invent their own idio-sects of Buddhism rather than follow any orthodoxy. We have an example of such an idio-sect in the thread called 'So What Is Enlightenment?', where our temporary visitor Nick Roach offered us his short-cut to enlightenment, free of monasticism, scriptures, and 'ancient teachings' (he might as well have said 'musty old scriptures'!).

Until we're enlightened/liberated/your choice of vocabulary, our choices are fully dictated by our social and genetic conditioning, not by skilful or wholesome mental processes. Until we can operate from that perspective, flouting orthodoxy simply because that's what suits us seems akin to playing a blindfolded game of pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey.

That's not to say that orthodoxy shouldn't be questioned of course. Scepticism is healthy, as evoked in the Kalama Sutta, as long as one remains equally sceptical of one's own tendency to judge others - or indeed judge entire institutions -as a way of avoiding working on one's own liberation.

I'm sure andyinkat will have some perspective to add here. Are you out there Andy? We miss you ...

[sabaijai]

Regarding the assumed ease of the monk's life, I was reading through some excerpts from the Tipitaka and this verse struck me:

Whoever takes a stick

to beings desiring ease,

when he himself is looking for ease,

will meet with no ease after death.

Whoever doesn't take a stick

to beings desiring ease,

when he himself is looking for ease,

will meet with ease after death.

Udana II, 3

[Darknight]

One could argue - and the Theravada school generally does argue - that the householder life is more self-centred. Obviously one can achieve much, spiritually, in either life station. But if you are arguing that the potential is higher for the householder I think you'll find a lot of disagreement from Buddhists around the world, yes primarily Theravadins but also many in Zen, Vajrayana, etc. For Mahayana in general, the Buddha nature may be recognised in everyone, yet even most Mahayana/Zen/Vajrayana Buddhists still support monasticism.

As you know i'm not a big fan of monastic and scholarship traditions myself, but i must agree with sabaijai that one doesn't rule out the other. In the end it comes down to the focus and intention of your joining or not joining a monastic order.

There are surely many monks who joined just for the ease of life (free food, no hard work, possibility to study compared to laymens life) of monkhood as there will be monks who joined purely for the spiritual aspect (meditation, peace and quit , a retreat from the materialistic world).

The same is true for the layman who can be more devout or spiritual even if living outside of a monastery. The one doesn't pertain to the other.

If the householder life were inherently better, then why have monasteries at all? Some people - mostly Westerners - may argue that they're not necessary at all, but I would say that's an extreme view.

I would tend to argue that only one thing is neccesary to create a situation for spiritual gainin either worlds.

"Basic needs of food and shelter have to be met"

If you are starving and running around for a few grains of food everyday, spiritual things will be last thing you think about, your whole focus will be on material gains.

if your children are crying cause they are sick and have no medicine you won't sit down to meditate. i would call it my definition of a favourable rebirth when you have those things covered

So you have two ways to achieve this basic need.

1. Cut down on all material things , up to the limit (monestary)

2. expand your material wealth to the point you don't need to worry about your basic needs anymore (western way ?)

In both options lie the same distractions:

The monk will be distracted by wondering "how would my life be when i'm rich"

The rich guy wonders "i have to make sure i won't lose my wealth"

I feel actually in order to gain elightenment or achieve "the middle path" you first have to see both ends of it. only then you can let go of both....

There was a reason buddha was born as a king, only by experiencing great riches as well as poor misery he was able to exeed both of these conditions. one experience is just the other side of the coin of the other one.

Of course some folks prefer to invent their own idio-sects of Buddhism rather than follow any orthodoxy. We have an example of such an idio-sect in the thread called 'So What Is Enlightenment?', where our temporary visitor Nick Roach offered us his short-cut to enlightenment, free of monasticism, scriptures, and 'ancient teachings' (he might as well have said 'musty old scriptures'!).

I thought that mr nick just had a different translation for the word "enlightenment". if we need to take "his" definition of enlightenment for real , i've been enlightened since i was 12 years old .

He's on his path , so good for him

Until we're enlightened/liberated/your choice of vocabulary, our choices are fully dictated by our social and genetic conditioning, not by skilful or wholesome mental processes. Until we can operate from that perspective, flouting orthodoxy simply because that's what suits us seems akin to playing a blindfolded game of pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey.

That's not to say that orthodoxy shouldn't be questioned of course. Scepticism is healthy, as evoked in the Kalama Sutta, as long as one remains equally sceptical of one's own tendency to judge others - or indeed judge entire institutions -as a way of avoiding working on one's own liberation.

A clear view is all that's needed, no matter in which direction your river flows...

I'm sure andyinkat will have some perspective to add here. Are you out there Andy? We miss you ...

i think he's moving to LOS as we speak sabaijai, probably settling in.

[sabaijai]

I knew we could all count on you, Darknight, to add further perspective.

For more or less the first 20 years I was involved in Buddhism, I felt compelled to critique all the sects and their traditions. I'd tell everyone I met who would listen how I thought the religion ought to be practiced or how it ought to be reformed. I was very good at criticising, even using the Tipitaka to challenge monks and lay leaders alike at various dhamma talks on occasion.

Eventually it dawned on me that my mind was more occupied with judging other people's practice than it was in minding my own. I eventually also began to suspect that I was like a dog chasing its own tail trying to create my own idio-sect (a word I've adopted from idiolect, the name given to a form of language spoken by only one person). I could see that the idio-sect I was trying to create -- which kept changing all the time of course -- was mostly driven by convenience, ego and sense gratification.

I've been fortunate to have some very good kalyanna mitta, spiritual friends, here in Thailand and elsewhere who have helped me understand how to turn the Tipitaka on myself instead of others, and how to let the outer forms - the orthodoxy - be what they are.

[Gohonzon]

I thought that my last statement may provoke a reaction-although it wasn't my intention to do so.

And now it gets a little complicated.From the tradition of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism ,and the monastism is related to the the early or provisional sutras.It must be remembered that the Buddha used 'expedient means' to convey his message.The final word on enlightenment is seen as that which lays within the pages of the Lotus Sutra.Overcoming difficulties-and the chanting of nam-myho-renge-kyo- in daily life is seen as the way of revealing ones own Buddhahood.This aherence (to the Lotus Sutra) is also held by other Mahayana sects-particularly in Japan (Pure Land,etc.)

It must be stressed that a lot of Nichiren Daishonin's writings on the provisional teachings were in opposition to the various Buddhist of the time ,schools who denied that enlightenment or Buddhahood could be acheived in this life-time.Something that flies in the face of that which is transmitted in the Lotus Sutra.Nichiren Daishonins Buddhism is also vehement in opposing the view that the ordained priestood can intervene on behalf of the layity in somehow transmitting enlightenment-or merit- on anyones behalf.Something,that I think that you will agree, seems to underpin a lot that happens within Thai Buddhism.Having thus said,I am very aware that many of those views are now challenged by those who are nearer the truth of Buddha Shakyamuni's teachings than has been the case.I myself have a hard time convincing some of my own sangha thi as they tend to hold that this past, false teaching, is still predominantly the case.

As far as 'idio-sects' (I think by this that you infer low egotism?)and the contribution offered by Nick.As I suggested to him, he had gained some realization-Buddha Shakayamuni never rejected the truth from wherever it came-that is, he was correct in saying that enlightenment is to be found in everyday life.This is the conclusion that most of those who have tried to interpret enlightenment accept (needless to say,partial realization is not the same thing as Buddhahood itself.) It is the oneness of life and the environment in all of its forms,or the interconnectedness and interrelatedness of all phenomena.To put it simply-enlightenment is but seeing reality as it is-devoid of delusion.

As I indicated above,both those who judge practioners from other form of Buddhist practice without familiarising themselves with even the most basic of understanding of what other Buddhists are about, and how they position themselves within Buddhist teachings.So it is that I offer a quote from a website that gives a rudimentary outline of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism.

"Buddhism expands the entire reality of life and shows the way to live a winning life -- the most fulfilled existence

Attaining Buddhahood does not mean becoming a special being. In this state, one still continues to work against and defeat the negative functions of life and transform any and all difficulty into causes for further development. It is a state of complete access to the boundless wisdom, compassion, courage, and other qualities inherent in life; with these one can create harmony with and among others and between human life and nature. Nichiren stated, "Buddhahood is the most difficult to demonstrate", but he also says, "That ordinary people born in the latter age can believe in the Lotus Sutra is due to the fact that the world of Buddhahood is present in the human world".

http://www.romancingthebuddha.com/stories/...rms.htm#Oneness

[sabaijai]

By idio-sect I mean a version of Buddhism (or other religion) that one creates on one's own, eschewing all other sects, thus creating, in a sense, a sect that includes only one person. Maverick Buddhism, in other words --the kind most Westerners practice when they first encounter Buddhism and haven't chosen a particular path. Same 'idio-' as in idiosyncratic, idiograph, etc.

Gohonzon if you follow Nichiren Shoshu faithfully, then you belong to a sect of Buddhism. Nichiren Shoshu of course has its own orthodoxy, and it's own priesthood.

Theravada also says that Nibbana can be reached in this lifetime.

The goal of buddhist meditation is Nibbana. We incline towards the peace of Nibbana and away from the complexities of the sensual realm, the endless cycles of habit. Nibbana is a goal that can be realized in this lifetime. We don’t have to wait until we die to know if it’s real.

from

Now Is The Knowing

The existence of things is not in dispute.

It is the manner in which they exist that must be clarified.

--Dalai Lama XIV

Edited August 20, 2004 by sabaijai

[Gohonzon]

Gohonzon if you follow Nichiren Shoshu faithfully, then you belong to a sect of Buddhism. Nichiren Shoshu of course has its own orthodoxy, and it's own priesthood.

I don't actually belong to the Nichiren Shoshu, but to Soka Gakkai (SGI) a lay organisation that is independent from the priesthood.

Thanks for reminding me that Theravada doesn't deny that "that Nibbana can be reached in this lifetime." A point that I attempted to make in my previous posting.Apologies for not making that clearer.

[sabaijai]

Gohonzon if you follow Nichiren Shoshu faithfully, then you belong to a sect of Buddhism. Nichiren Shoshu of course has its own orthodoxy, and it's own priesthood.

I don't actually belong to the Nichiren Shoshu, but to Soka Gakkai (SGI) a lay organisation that is independent from the priesthood.

Thanks for reminding me that Theravada doesn't deny that "that Nibbana can be reached in this lifetime." A point that I attempted to make in my previous posting.Apologies for not making that clearer.

I'd completely forgotten about Nichiren Shoshu's controversial excommunication of Ikeda/Soka Gakkai in 1992. From now on when someone mentions Nichiren I won't automatically assume they belong to one sect or the other.

[andyinkat]

Did I see my name mentioned above?

My apologies for my abrupt disappearance from the forum; the reason is simple - I'm in Thailand!

I had plenty of time in my hands back in England waiting for the big off' now I'm here I have no time to sit in front of a computer. I think this will change when I get settled and will hopefully visit frequently from September.

On this topic, I am in nong Khai, a small town with 37 wats - that's a lot of monks. A lot of them are puffing away on ciggies, swinging from hammocks made from their robes and chasing the girls but hey, they're guys too. I have met some very impressive monks too with whom I hope to develop a good relationship. The bottom line is, you can't generalise.

I know Nichiren Buddhism quite well - it is effectively the only from of Buddhism to reject monasticism completely. I haven't got time to go into this but my take is that in its beliefs and practices it has a sense of comformity that sets it apart from the spirit of most other forms of Buddhism which encourage a diversity of paths to suit differing spiritual needs and motivations. Monasticism is a wonderful path for some and I am glad that in most forms of Buddhism the option is there. One of my deepest regrets in Thailand is that the optin is not available for women as already I have met quite a few for whom it would be a wonderful step to take.

[Gohonzon]

"I know Nichiren Buddhism quite well ...I haven't got time to go into this but my take is that in its beliefs and practices it has a sense of comformity that sets it apart from the spirit of most other forms of Buddhism which encourage a diversity of paths to suit differing spiritual needs and motivations."

Eloquent words perhaps.But-time or no time-surely such a sweeping generalization cannot be left without any qualifications whatsoever.If you do indeed know the Buddhism of Nicherin Daishonin as well as you claim -then this should prove to be of no major difficulty for you.In the 'spirit' of Buddhism'

[Gohonzon]

"I know Nichiren Buddhism quite well ...I haven't got time to go into this but my take is that in its beliefs and practices it has a sense of comformity that sets it apart from the spirit of most other forms of Buddhism which encourage a diversity of paths to suit differing spiritual needs and motivations."

Eloquent words perhaps.

But-time or no time-surely such a sweeping generalization cannot be left without any qualification whatsoever.If you do indeed know the Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin as well as you claim -then this should prove to be of no major difficulty for you.

In the 'spirit' of Buddhism'

[sabaijai]

Did I see my name mentioned above?

My apologies for my abrupt disappearance from the forum; the reason is simple - I'm in Thailand!

I had plenty of time in my hands back in England waiting for the big off' now I'm here I have no time to sit in front of a computer. I think this will change when I get settled and will hopefully visit frequently from September.

On this topic, I am in nong Khai, a small town with 37 wats - that's a lot of monks. A lot of them are puffing away on ciggies, swinging from hammocks made from their robes and chasing the girls but hey, they're guys too. I have met some very impressive monks too with whom I hope to develop a good relationship. The bottom line is, you can't generalise.

I know Nichiren Buddhism quite well - it is effectively the only from of Buddhism to reject monasticism completely. I haven't got time to go into this but my take is that in its beliefs and practices it has a sense of comformity that sets it apart from the spirit of most other forms of Buddhism which encourage a diversity of paths to suit differing spiritual needs and motivations. Monasticism is a wonderful path for some and I am glad that in most forms of Buddhism the option is there. One of my deepest regrets in Thailand is that the optin is not available for women as already I have met quite a few for whom it would be a wonderful step to take.

Welcome back, Andy, and welcome to Thailand. We figured you were in transit. Just pop in when you feel like it, no pressure to park yourself in front of a screen when you have better things to do.

Monastic life for women is abundantly available in Thailand. I guess you mean full bhikkhuni ordination, all 312 vows. In that case there are indeed several Thai bhikkhunis already living and practicing in Thailand. So far all have ordained in other countries, namely India, Sri Lanka and Taiwan (Korea as well?), and then returned here to live the monastic life.

The most recently ordained Thai bhikkhuni, Dhammananda Bhikkhuni, caused quite a stir when she returned from Sri Lanka to a 'women's wat' near Nakhon Pathom.

Details on the history and status of the Thai bhikkhuni movement can be found here:

http://www.thaibhikkhunis.org/

It is now possible to ordain at Watr [sic, the /r/ is necessary] Songdhammakalyani near Nakhon Pathom. I'll post the full regulations in a new topic thread. The presence of Sri Lankan bhikkhunis in Thailand are making this possible.

One day when Thailand has a quorum of bhikkhunis (some sources say 10, others 5), and I should think that won't be too many more years in the future, the ordination of Thais by Thais will take place here. The Sangha establishment may not be too happy about it, but with such leading female intellectuals as Sanitsuda Ekachai behind the movement, I've no doubt it will settle into place.

Of course women all over Thailand are welcome to join Thai monastic life as 8-precept mae chee, with shaved heads and white robes. There are thousands of women living in monasteries as mae chee. They have their own organisation and a proper ordination procedure. They consider themselves Atta-sila (eight precept) nuns.

Hope you enjoy Nong Khai. You may find the hot season rough, if you stay that long -- NK suffers one of the highest median temps during the hot, and being in a river plain you really feel it. I've spent a fair mount of time there and in nearby Udon, Loei, Mahasarakham (the hottest of the hot!). If you have a chance, and haven't already done so, consider a side trip to Ubon Ratchathani for a visit to Wat Pa Nanachat Beung Wai, the international forest monastery started by Ajahn Chah.